Venice-based Trueface is the latest computer vision startup to be snapped up by a Virginia company that sells security technology to airports across the country.
The company, called Pangiam, now has access to Trueface's suite of software powering contactless temperature checks and social distancing compliance monitoring. Last year, it installed AI-powered kiosks at U.S. Air Force bases to recognize individuals without person-to-person contact.
As air travel picks up, Pangiam is gearing up to pitch airports on technology that lets travelers check in for flights and board planes without so much as a boarding pass.
The deal — for how much Pangiam wouldn't say — comes as airlines watch ticket sales soar again. Air travel over Memorial Day Weekend surpassed any other period during the pandemic, according to data from the Transportation Security Administration.
"Adding Trueface's technology solutions to Pangiam's offerings comes at a perfect time, as travel is poised to continue to rebound and passengers want reassurances that the highest health and safety protocols are being followed," Kirk Konert, a partner at Pangiam's parent company AE Industrial Partners, said in a statement.
Trueface did not immediately respond to a request to comment.
It's not the first move Pangiam has made to tie health and ticket screening together through biometric technology.
In March, the company bought a facial recognition system called veriScan, which is used by 40 airlines to check in passengers before a flight.
In a statement announcing that acquisition, Pangiam said the technology allows a person's face to "serve as both their passport and, for many airlines, their boarding pass."
The industry built around biometric technology, which uses fingerprints and facial scans to identify people, is steeped in controversy. Some are calling on Congress to set boundaries around its use. On Tuesday, Seattle's King County became the first to ban administrative offices — including the Sheriff's Department — from using facial recognition technology. One Seattle City Council member cited "distinct threats" the tech could pose to residents, including "potential misidentification, bias and the erosion of our civil liberties."
Elsewhere, biometric checks are seen as a way to automate and speed up routine processes such as boarding a flight. At airports including LAX, passengers can board planes at some gates by walking through a scanner that runs on biometric technology built by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Trueface has raised about $4.4 million in venture capital since it was founded in 2013, according to Pitchbook data. Co-founders Shaun Moore and Nezare Chafni got their start in facial recognition technology by designing a smart doorbell system called Chui before pivoting to focus on software.
Both will serve "key leadership positions" within Pangiam, according to a statement.
Amazon may have halted the sale of its facial recognition software to police, but the move hasn't eased pressure on the tech giant.
In a letter sent to its CEO Jeff Bezos on Tuesday, Democratic Congressman Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif) blasted Amazon's handling of its software, Rekognition, calling on the company to provide detailed info about privacy and bias inherent in the program.
Amazon could not be immediately reached for comment.
But, the letter comes on the heels of Amazon's announcement that it banned police use of the surveillance software for a year so that Congress has time to place stricter regulations on the technology, a move it supports. Microsoft placed a similar moratorium on their facial recognition technology and IBM dropped theirs altogether citing worries about violating basic human rights and freedoms.
An image from Amazon Rekognition's online developer guide.
Gomez, who represents Los Angeles and sits on the House Oversight and Reform Committee, called Amazon's move nothing more than "performative."
"Corporations have been quick to share expressions of support for the Black Lives Matter movement following the public outrage over the murders of Black Americans like George Floyd at the hands of police," he wrote. "Unfortunately, too many of these gestures have been performative at best. Calling on Congress to regulate facial recognition technology is one of these gestures."
The letter was another salvo in what Gomez characterizes as a two-year long effort to get the e-commerce giant to divulge information about how widespread use of the surveillance software is and how data is collected.
"After two years of formal congressional inquiries – including bicameral letters, House Oversight Committee hearings, and in-person meetings – Amazon has yet to adequately address questions about the dangers its facial recognition technology can pose to privacy and civil rights, the accuracy of the technology, and its disproportionate impact on communities of color," Gomez told Bezos.
The issue has played out for years in the Los Angeles communities Gomez represents. Activists regularly object to the use of technology that has the potential to exacerbate racial bias and impede on privacy. The issue exploded anew on the national stage in the aftermath of the George Floyd protests.
Gomez told Politico last week he's drafting legislation that would place restrictions on local and state police from using the technology.
Read Gomez's full letter below:
Dear Mr. Bezos:
On June 10, Amazon announced a one-year moratorium on police use of its facial recognition technology, Rekognition. In a statement, your company said it supports federal regulation for facial recognition technology and "stand[s] ready to help if requested." In the spirit of that offer, I write to request information on the implementation of the moratorium, and resubmit a list of questions I have asked your company over the course of nearly two years on public safety and civil rights concerns associated with Amazon's facial recognition technology – questions that have largely gone ignored or woefully unaddressed.
While I am encouraged by the direction Amazon appears to be taking on this issue, the ambiguity of the announcement raises more questions than answers. For example, the 102-word blog post announcement fails to specify whether Amazon will stop selling Rekognition to police departments during the moratorium; whether the company will stop the development of its facial recognition system during the moratorium; whether the moratorium would encompass both local and federal law enforcement agencies beyond the police, such as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); whether the moratorium applies to current contracts with law enforcement agencies; and whether Amazon plans to submit their technology to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for testing before it resumes operations. I am also troubled by the one-year expiration of the moratorium and how Amazon will proceed in the event federal legislation is not signed into law within this self-imposed timeframe.
After two years of formal congressional inquiries – including bicameral letters, House Oversight Committee hearings, and in-person meetings – Amazon has yet to adequately address questions about the dangers its facial recognition technology can pose to privacy and civil rights, the accuracy of the technology, and its disproportionate impact on communities of color. Below is a representative, non-exhaustive list of questions I have asked Amazon regarding your company's facial recognition policies, and its decision to market it and sell it to law enforcement agencies. I look forward to your prompt and public engagement on these matters.
Information on any internal accuracy or bias assessments performed on Rekognition, and the results for race, gender, skin pigmentation, and age. Requested on November 29, 2018.
Further information on why – despite Amazon's recommend use of Rekognition at a 95% confidence threshold – it sells the product to law enforcement agencies and departments with an option to operate the software at the default 80% threshold. Requested on February 6, 2019; February 27, 2019; and September 26, 2019.
Information fully responsive to my question on whether Amazon built protections into the Rekognition system to protect the privacy rights of innocent Americans. Requested on November 29, 2018.
Details regarding mechanisms – if any – built into Recognition that allow for the automatic deletion of unused biometric data. Requested on November 29, 2018.
Clarification on whether Amazon conducts any audits of Rekognition use by law enforcement to ensure that the software is not being abused for secretive government surveillance. Requested on February 6, 2019; and February 27, 2019.
Answers regarding reports that Amazon is engaged in surveillance partnerships with over 1,350 police departments across the United States. Requested on February 6, 2019; and February 27, 2019.
Records and information related to all law enforcement or intelligence agencies that Amazon has contracted or otherwise communicated with regarding acquisition of Rekognition and currently use the service. Requested on February 6, 2019.
Information on whether Amazon Rekognition is currently integrated with any police body-camera technology or existing public-facing camera networks. Requested on February 6, 2019; and February 27, 2019.
Clarification on whether the training dataset (rather than subsequent calibration sets) skewed white, or whether it was primed to recognize white faces. Requested on February 6, 2019; and February 27, 2019.
Answers regarding reports that Amazon is marketing this technology to ICE. Requested on February 6, 2019; and February 27, 2019.
Corporations have been quick to share expressions of support for the Black Lives Matter movement following the public outrage over the murders of Black Americans like George Floyd at the hands of police. Unfortunately, too many of these gestures have been performative at best. Calling on Congress to regulate facial recognition technology is one of these gestures. However, Amazon – as a global leader in technology and innovation – has a unique opportunity before them to put substantive action behind their sentiments of "solidarity with the Black community" by not selling a flawed product to police, and instead, play a critical role in ending systemic racism in our nation's criminal justice system.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter. I look forward to your responses on this issue.
Member of Congress
- L.A. Congressman Slams Amazon's Facial Recognition Technology ... ›
- RealNetworks facial recognition tech IDs celebrities in videos — and ... ›
- The definitive account of Amazon's perilous ambition: Key scenes ... ›
- Anaheim's 'Star Wars' Celebration is Canceled
- L.A. Congressman Looks to Limit Police Use of Facial Recognition Technology
- L.A. Seed Rounds Are Getting Bigger
Anaheim's 'Star Wars' Celebration is Canceled
Chalk up another disappointment to the coronavirus. The organizers of Anaheim's 'Star Wars Celebration' are calling it off this year, due to concerns about hosting an indoor event in the midst of a global pandemic. Would-be attendees can exchange their tickets for the 2022 event (plus a limited edition stormtrooper pin), trade them for merch or get a refund. You can find more information at their website.
L.A. Congressman Looks to Limit Police Use of Facial Recognition Technology
Amazon, IBM and Microsoft either pulled sales of their facial recognition technology to law enforcement or halted their business last week as pressure from civil rights leaders, companies and legislators grew over how the surveillance technologies were being used.
The issue has played out for years in the Los Angeles communities Congressman Jimmy Gomez represents. Activists regularly object to the use of technology that has the potential to exacerbate racial bias. Now, it has exploded anew on the national stage in the aftermath of the George Floyd protests.
Gomez, who sits on the House Oversight and Reform Committee, told Politico last week he's drafting legislation that would place restrictions on local and state police from using the technology.
"If facial recognition is considered the future of policing, it's just going to perpetuate the same biases that are already out there because it's in and of itself is biased," he told VentureBeat in a separate interview. "It's been flawed. It's been shown to be flawed and can [misidentify] people of color, mainly black women, Latinos, African Americans — and the darker the skin color, the more mistakes it makes. That's going to lead to more negative interactions between law enforcement and people of color, which can lead to deadly consequences."
Gomez told the outlet Amazon gave him the run around as Congress probed the issue.
"We need them to cooperate and give us data so we can be better informed on how to craft this legislation," he said. "If not, we'll just work with the civil rights groups, and we'll just try to pass it through, and they're going to most likely try to oppose it, in my opinion, at the end of the day if they don't like it."
L.A. Seed Rounds Are Getting Bigger
Image from Amplify.LA
In the first quarter of this year, 19 Los Angeles startups raised seed rounds of more than $2.5 million. The average seed round raised was $4 million, according to Amplify.LA's latest LA Seed Report.
"While nothing new for larger ecosystems like SF and NY, it's a relatively new phenomenon here in L.A.," wrote Conner Sundberg, an associate at Amplify.LA.
Amplify also found seed activity in Q1'20 was nearly double that of Q1'19. 38 companies closed seed rounds in the first quarter while fintech re-emerged as one of the top dealmaking sectors.
"Since starting this project years back, we've noted more funds being raised in L.A., a higher percentage of capital coming from local investors, and early stage teams tackling more varied verticals," wrote Sundberg.
— Ben Bergman
- Los Angeles Venture Deal Activity Is Up in Q1 - dot.LA ›
- The Fund Launches a Venture Capital Firm in Los Angeles - dot.LA ›
- Los Angeles' Tech and Startup Scene is Growing. - dot.LA ›